Seòmar agus comataidhean

If the cabinet secretary is prepared to discuss the term “appropriate”, I am happy to seek to withdraw amendment 128. Cabinet secretary, are you objecting totally to amendment 128, or are you prepared to discuss the term that you identified in your comments?

Dr Hood, do you want to respond on that issue? We are now six years on from the vote, and suddenly all this legislation has to be wrapped up in a year. It will be incredibly hard for us to scrutinise it. What would your advice to the Scottish Parliament be on ensuring that we do not miss out on any vital legislation that might change people’s lives here?

Perhaps I can follow up on those comments with Mr Livingstone, given his remarks about risk and uncertainty. What risk assessments should we, as parliamentarians, be carrying out to identify elements of the legislation that might be most vulnerable in the process?

Dr Hancox, you gave us an interesting set of thoughts about what we should be thinking about. Do you have any comments about what we should be doing? Should the legislation go through as is?

Professor Young, do you have any comments about what we should be doing to attempt to mitigate the potentially damaging impact of the bill?

I appreciate the written evidence that the witnesses submitted in advance. It feels unprecedented, because they are all measured witnesses and the background that they all have gives weight to their worrying comments about legal certainty, risks, unintended consequences, lack of scrutiny and lack of Government capacity.

Michael Clancy, in the general comments at the start of your submission, you say:

“there is no reason why retained EU law … cannot be considered a sustainable concept. On the other hand, it would be equally possible following a thorough review and relevant amendments that incorporation into domestic law in the four UK jurisdictions could be completed.”

Will you say a bit more on that? Thus far, the tone has been, “This will be a disaster.” What would be a more positive approach that would enable a degree of scrutiny and accountability for not only parliamentarians but the people whom we represent? Will you kick off, Mr Clancy?

I will be brief, because I know that we have to wind up at some point.

To follow on from the Eurovision comment, there is the whole issue of film and broadcast media. Broadcast media are fantastic at telling us what is happening now. However, we had a humanitarian emergency fund meeting last week, and I am wondering whether there is a space for more stories of the people who are helped by the fund or of what is happening next. That is partly about communicating culture. People are still creating drama and documentaries. Is there scope for our broadcast media in Scotland, such as the BBC, Channel 4 and STV, to do more work in that regard to communicate those stories, both in Scotland and more broadly?

I would add, as a postscript, that thousands of Ukrainians already live in Scotland, so could we create opportunities for people who are skilled in that sector and have those language skills? Could we make those connections?

Picking up on that last point, I, too, wonder what we do after today. Perhaps something that we need to think about is how we record some of the ideas that have been shared so that we can then share them with our cultural and higher education sectors and the Scottish Government. I am thinking, for example, of Erasmus, where things could be done, and are examples of best practice, including what the British Council is doing, that we could share more widely.

That was just a quick response to the previous comments. I just think that, if we did that, we would not lose the ideas that have come from around the table and it might encourage other people to think about what they could do, which would be a good thing.

On the theme of places, we obviously have twinning, but I am also wondering about the connections that can be made with institutions; after all, it is now a lot easier to make connections online. Some of the most inspiring things that I have seen have involved live broadcasts, but that sort of thing requires a lot of co-ordination. It might sound simple to put on a film, but people need to build and curate that. Are there any opportunities to make connections with our broadcasting companies to help people whether they are in Scotland or Ukraine—or, indeed, on the MS Victoria? Have we got the physical broadcasting capacity to make those connections?

That is a really good point. When it comes to the people, the partnerships, the links that we have, the better links that could be developed and the work that is being done by the British Council, it is all about how that work is promoted.

Before the meeting, Jenni Minto and I talked about individual sponsorship for sculpture in Scotland. There is something about giving people that opportunity, whether they are corporate sponsors or individuals who make donations to existing cultural organisations in Scotland that are doing that outreach work and supporting artists through the “perfect storm” that is talked about in the committee report that was published on Monday. How do we make such connections?

Looking forward, we have the excellent piece of work from the British Council, which is mapping what is coming in arts and festival organisations. Are there ways to co-ordinate so that individual artists can think, “In six months, I could be at X festival in Scotland”? Obviously, I am thinking of the Edinburgh international festivals and the range of opportunities there.

Is there something that we could do as a committee to help to make those connections? An example might be for us to write to the cabinet secretary, sharing the ideas that have come out today and talking about Erasmus—I am thinking about the points about visas and planning ahead. Are there things that we could do to give the work a degree of energy and include the connectivity that has come from this round-table discussion?